Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (
More info?)
Yes, it is a good idea thank you and is how I've been operating for the last
several years.
The trade off is an older drive 'might be' slower than the newer big fat
momma depending how old it is but even that trade-off has been marginalized
as most drives for the last 5 years or so all spin at 72,000 with seek time
varying slightly here and there. If you put your swap drive on the big fat
momma that will help offset any diminished performance which is really
negligible compared to what WinRot does. We also get much better performance
when putting each drive on its own cable with its own channel. Your
motherboard supports this so take advantage of it.
Now the real quandry is how to backup the big fat momma? Although rare she
may fail someday herself and then what? I use redundant backup by backing up
my data from the backup machine onto disks on older machines I kept around.
The tradeoff being a higher electric bill which is only about $30 a year per
machine.
<%= Clinton Gallagher
"Sancho" <Sancho@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:07004DBA-0907-421D-9606-326EA6CB6D5B@microsoft.com...
> Hi ClintonG:
> It sounds like a good idea; in fact I still have my old 30GB (in good
> shape)
> that I most likely will use as a bootable, so I can use my new HD as
> storage,
> for music, videos and stuff. Thank you
>
> "clintonG" wrote:
>
>> Its my experience and highly suggested that people avoid the use of the
>> larger disks as the bootable primary drive. As a second drive with
>> nothing
>> but data yes.
>>
>> The point is, all Windows OS are still garbage cans and over time become
>> slower and slower and slower until the day comes they won't boot or
>> become
>> so slow they are useless. This is being called WinROT and there are
>> several
>> factors involved but the most well known is the use of the system
>> registry
>> which is a great big garbage can that gets filled with all kinds of
>> entries
>> many many many of which are left behind even when uninstalling software.
>> The
>> use of the registry cleaners has not proven to solve the problem.
>>
>> Buy a new 40 and avoid the hassle. If you need to install more programs
>> get
>> an 80 but 40 will hold a lot of software when the data is on another
>> drive.
>> Disks are so inexpensive I would buy the 80 myself which is exactly what
>> I
>> do just to get the little extra. I spent my extra money on Acronis
>> TrueImage
>> to image the primary drive and put all the images on the second drive
>> (the
>> big fat momma 250). Then when Windows goes rotten all you need to do is
>> reformat and restore whatever image you want. This is one of several
>> methodologies that people have learned to work with the garbage can that
>> is
>> impossible to escape.
>>
>>
>> <%= Clinton Gallagher
>> METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service"
>> NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
>> URL http://metromilwaukee.com/
>> URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Sancho" <Sancho@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:A4A68BB9-B293-49F4-96F1-2E05BACE0A57@microsoft.com...
>> >I just bought a new Ultra/ATA 250 GB, to be used as my only drive. My
>> > original Win XP is a little old, and doesn't include neither SP 1 nor
>> > SP
>> > 2,
>> > which I have in separate CD's. So, when installing XP, at the point of
>> > formatting my drive, it only can handle smaller drives, and takes 127
>> > GB
>> > as
>> > the whole disk. I've been able to create a second logical drive by
>> > creating a
>> > second partition in the free portion of the disk, but I wish I could
>> > convert
>> > the whole thing in only one partition. And I couldn't , I would like to
>> > resize the second one by making it bigger and shrinking the first one.
>> > But
>> > I'm not purchasing PartitionMagic only for that. Does it make sense?
>> > Who
>> > can
>> > give a better (and cheaper) option?
>>
>>
>>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram